skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think actual real life is so complicated that we can't really guess what specific technological advancements will rocket us into silicon valley imagined utopia, we speculate but we don't have any way of accurately predicting this.

Will it be the self-driving car, humanoid robots, chat bots, Google search with adsense (tm)? Hard to say. Each new thing brings some positives and negatives but it really seems the bad has an uncanny ability to keep up with the good most of the time.
So what, everyone is supposed to pretend that everything Kubrick touched was completely perfect?

That would be a hagiography, not a serious artistic critique.

It seems more than fair to point out that Kubrick was touchy and thin-skinned. You could argue that it's an inseparable part of his overall genius -- but only if you're allowed to criticise him in the first place!
What are these problems, exactly?
It would not be so tough to provide an API call with a name like "PredictableRand".
Your technical moat is the complexity, quality and breadth of your solution; everything can be copied but the question is the effort. It is often just simpler to just buy you out vs building; especially if it's not only complex, good quality and has a client base. See also my other reply to you; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40283601

The OP question was about LLM based companies using OpenAI api's. Most (almost all) of these are thin wrappers with some prompting; most of the ones introduced here on HN or Reddit, I can outperform in minutes. I try them all to see if someone is doing something interesting, but 99% are not, they just took some SaaS starter and added AI in there and threw it on social media. Even the ones that went somewhat further are still just doing straight forward things that can be replaced trivially inside the OpenAI playground. That's no moat at all. It looks flashy but...
Mullvad complies, but they go out of their way to keep very little information. If you don't have the information in the first place, you can't surrender it.
I'm not saying it necessarily impedes, I'm saying that at least it's never positive, at most neutral. The fact you believe it should or not does not change the harsh reality.

I'm saying that to sell to enteprise with a good UX you need to check a lot of checkboxes, and even if they are independent , the probability to have:
* can sell to enterprise

is less than

* can sell to enterprise + have a good UX.

because while you can sell to enterprise without a good UX (regardless of how much you and I feel bad about this), you can't sell to enteprise without being to navigate their processes, without being able to talk and please their compliance team, to reassure that no you will no go bankrupt in 1 year.

And I'm saying that it's most likely to impede having a good UX because a company's resource is limited.

To start with strong UX fundation means that you've decided either to recrute one less dev, and instead hire a UX designer, or you've recruited a developer with a good UX sense (and it does not cost less, most likely more, than a developer without a good UX sense).

Same, when developing a new feature, taking the UX in account takes equally or more time/money than without.

So at the end a lot of company selling to enterprise ends up with a product without a good UX.

And indeed Odoo is a good example that it's not impossible, which I'm not saying, just less probable.
It has been a long time since I have read v8 source code, but I remember it depended on if the array is holey or not, so it would switch back to object based array instead of a contiguous array. (there were other conditions but it's the notable one I remember)
Safer nukes are the most dangerous thing. It only works if everybody is MAD.
Yep, having proper types instead of passing around strings would have prevented this.
RFC4880 uses ElGamal for the asymmetric encryption and so it's a discrete log problem. Roughly the private key x should satisfy `a=b^x mod n` where b and n are known, and a is part of the public key. It goes through similarly for elliptic curve-based schemes.
It's a bit funny to call this "runtime" when malloc/free are nothing but library functions.
Good luck with that. A simple read() might block or not, depending on what the descriptor is and how it's configured. How would you statically detect this?
I just measured this with the np.ascontiguousarray call (inside the loop of course, if you do it outside the loop when i2 is assigned to, then ofc you don't measure the overhead of np.ascontiguousarray) and the runtime is about the same as without this call, which I would expect given everything TFA explains. So you still have the 100x slowdown.

TFA links to a GitHub repo with code resizing non-zero images, which you could use both to easily benchmark your suggested change, and to check whether the output is still correct.
I do not share the same experience as the author, as someone working for the mentioned company.

There is a wide range of types of design docs, and none of them are useful. I've rarely seen any useful design doc at Google. I feel that design docs are for engineers who are too much process-oriented.

Here are the types of design docs I've encountered in the wild:

* The promo design doc: it's not really explaining what this is trying to solve, it's more stating that this project is awesome, and makes the company better. The logical conclusion is that the author of this doc should be promoted.

* The turbo-encabulator[1] design doc: this is a technobabble design doc which is full of terms never encountered before, and which is not understandable unless you're a senior member of the team. I'm sometimes not even sure the senior members of the team understand it...

* The new-grad design doc: this a design doc with no substance, but as the person just graduated from university, they felt compelled to make is as long as possible, to prove... I don't know what... It is not conveying any information. They most likely copied/pasted huge chunks of the code they've already written, to fill most of the ~70 pages of the doc.

* The made-up-facts design doc: this a design doc full of "everybody knows that", "they all say". Of course, it's not as obviously done as some politicians do it. But the design doc will push their design with "this follows good practices", "this software is slow, therefore..." who defined the good practice? why is it a good practice? what is slow? was it measured? is it an end user feeling?

This is 99% of the design docs I've seen out there. Of course, exceptions exists, but they're very rare, in my experience. I'm shocked that the author pushes for this practice... But again, they were no engineer, they were a director, I guess design docs make sense for their position, for which I'm still trying to figure out the value these folks bring.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_encabulator
I think part of the problem with buybacks is simply that they are very opaque, even when they are working. With dividends, it is all very nice and tidy: your shares went down by $X and you got $X/share cash in your account. (Which you might then have had reinvested.) With buybacks... what did that $100B spent do for me, anyway? It is not so blindingly obvious, even if it's there if you look.

And so people become skeptical.
If there's a court order from due judicial process, isnt't it sanctioned invasion of privacy?
> It's probably just me, but the video in these video calls is mostly a waste of bandwidth, I am never paying attention to the bobbing heads in the screen

"People and culture" departments would argue that it creates a sense of belonging and cohesion to the team.
No mention of poll()? It's not at all how asyncio works then.
Forbes.com is basically a blogging platform with a small number of journalists and an army of random contributors, quite a few of whom are scam artists. All those random blogs are not terribly different from medium.com in essence, but Forbes.com presents them with a veneer of authority, when they’re really just unvetted, unedited garbage for the most part. I’m surprised the domain isn’t in the gutter yet.
> What an excellent resource! (And yes Outlook is a pain and supports so very little!)

So outlook today is the internet explorer of mail?
Look, I get that there's a certain holy book that says drinking urine helps. Get this in your head: it's REALLY, really, really, REALLY bad.

Ureum is what's called a "fixation agent". What does that mean? It's a very strong poison that leaves a beautiful corpse (yes, really). And yes, your body has a tolerance for it. If you exceed that tolerance you'll die, very quickly, or you'll die of thirst first. Yes, you can die of thirst while drinking. A Belgian student managed to do that just a few years ago. He drank oyster sauce, I believe. Liters of it.

You know the "babies in bottles", that you can see in some musea? That's what ureum does to you if you exceed your tolerance.

Obviously, if you have kidney stones, BOTH kidneys are under heavy stress. So heavy they can die. Both of them. You will NOT like that outcome (dialysis for life, with periods without dialysis if you manage to get a kidney transplant, but you'll still spend YEARS going to the hospital every day, risk getting infected with horrible diseases every time, and it'll hurt. Every time. You'll be tired, every second of every day, for decades. You cannot touch alcohol, meat, cigarettes, ... without serious immediate consequences, plus if you touch any of those doctors will deny you further replacement organs. Oh and even if you do get a replacement organ, constant heavy antibiotics AND immune suppressants. You shouldn't swim, and certainly not in the ocean or ... you shouldn't go into nature, you shouldn't eat anything remotely unsafe, ... Is this really a price you're willing to pay?)

You should drink water. The purer the better. Even distilled (not laboratory-grade multiple-times distilled water, don't go crazy). Not too much, but not nothing. And GET MEDICAL HELP.

And yes, it will hurt. A LOT. It will hurt more when you drink. If you can't get medical help within a few hours, drink anyway. Yes, it will hurt more than any pain you've ever felt in your life, you'll be crying. I know. Do it anyway.

Until you get medical help, suck it up.

Don't drive yourself to medical help unless you're sure you can take it.
What are you trying to accomplish with these take home tests to begin with? If they can successfully solve it with ChatGPT that implies they understand how to use tools which are paramount to developer success. Do you want them to waste a bunch of their time solving a pointless problem? Is that how you treat your employees, too?
To software product builders, bug-reporting must be an inevitable task for your team.

But why are we putting so much time into it? Isn’t there any better or more efficient way to do it?

We spend significant resources on repetitive tasks such as reproducing steps, recording screens, and taking screenshots of DevTools. That’s why we are developing QAing!

QAing is a seamless bug-reporting tool designed to enhance efficiency. And I believe that our product would transform the way you report bugs and ultimately save your valuable resources.

QAing provides exceptional features that enable you to report bugs with just a click.

session replay

auto-saved debug data

real-time screen saving that

Plus, we do have even more exceptional features in the pipeline. QAing will offer an entirely new experience unlike anything you’ve experienced before!

Additionally, we recently launched QAing on Product Hunt. It would be grateful if you support us with upvotes. Experience our outstanding features earlier than anyone and save your team’s resources! Any feedback or thoughts about QAing are very welcomed!
I love Zulip, but Twist's free tier seems to be restricted enough that I'm put off trying it. Maybe a month of retention is OK practically, but I'd hate losing conversations if I don't end up needing it enough to pay, so I'm not even inclined to try.
The cited paper[0] only increases my concern:

> “But what if your adversary is NSA or Mossad? Won’t they have the computing capabilities to run a 280 attack?” Such a question is irrelevant. If your problem is to protect against such adversaries, the answer is probably not cryptography.

Handwaving away better cryptographic security on the basis that they'll probably get what they want some other way does not work for me. This is likely and often true, but those other methods may be more expensive, be unusable without revealing their hand, or be politically or diplomatically sensitive.

We should not give up on our security being as resistant as possible to these agencies on such a basis.

[0] https://eprint.iacr.org/2019/1492.pdf
It's harder and requires more red tape.
I have a reverse problem at the place I work. When I ask people to write a very high level design doc for a fairly trivial task they go - "There many more way to get this done so writing these is useless. And as the task is trivial an engineer should be able to figure out one of these ways and do it."

Many of these people are external consultants who have been working with the company for 15+yrs. So, there is a fair standard in place already because the tasks are done by the same people. But then they go out of their way trying to create a boogeyman of "what happens if people don't follow the standards?".

The end result is that either design docs don't exist or woefully out of date. Hence the company has to keep hiring these same consultants year after year on hugely inflated costs.
I'm hopeful but wary of "empathic" AI
I've heard that buybacks can be weighted toward purchasing stock back from management and staff before buying back from the market.

If this is true, then I'd prefer dividends. I can put the capital in another company if I choose.

Buybacks seem like another lever to help management class cash out as a company starts to slump.
The beautiful story of a 100% French-grown organic Apple
That, and the terms themselves tend to invoke clues about the meaning. Privacy implies there is an identity, but it is kept hidden. Anonymity implies there is no identity established so there is nothing to hide.

We don't see much of the latter since most web services require an email to sign up, at minimum, which still leaves discoverable bread crumbs. The web services that require you to give up nothing to use them are far less popular, so I guess I can see why people might conflate the two.
As I said above, a simple court order can destroy any attempt at privacy. All (serious) VPN providers claim they don't store logs. But that does not mean that a court can't force them to do so. When combined with a gag order you can have someone collecting all your traffic without you even realizing it. And that's just the VPN provider, which usually doesn't own any datacenters. The datacenter providers can also receive the orders to either monitor traffic or even install hardware to do so. If you want any hope of privacy, you steer clear of all big commercial "privacy" providers, because they are very high on every government agency's list. And you just need one component in the entire chain to be compromised.
The mi300x is AMDs h100/200 competitor.
What's the actual problem with it? Or is this just a language "purity" thing?
Hold on with the accusations…

There is nothing wrong with testing people on simple tasks as part of an interview. This isn’t a long task, likely 30 minutes work!

It’s to ensure what they say they can do is correct. Using AI tools is fine but we need to see an understanding too.
If they remove even the small edge from pocket "knives" then there is almost no reason to carry it in the pocket... Without small edge you can't even prepare bottle of wine to be opened :>

On the other hand: there are new businesses and new market and a whole plain-old-future just to use all that super steels but old Victorinox is scared out of business ?? Idiotic just like artisanal electrificians cloing businesses just as electric cars start to hit mass market... Some adjusting is needed, that's all !

But some business diversification is obviously good.
Affine AI: Communicate with AI on whiteboard instead of chatbox
Qweu
Market power and vested interest, Forbes has a good name and ranks high, more people visit them, Google makes a lot of money off Forbes' display ads even if their content is garbage
https://archive.is/8fkJi
Beware that despite all marketing statements, VPN providers can easily be forced to store logs using court orders, even if they don't do it by default.
These systems were developed before unsolicited commercial promotions started flooding these mediums, later, automation made it worse.
> This individual is suspected of being a member of the Mossos d’Esquadra (Catalonia’s police force) and of using their internal knowledge to assist the Democratic Tsunami movement.

...and...

> The requests were made under the guise of anti-terrorism laws, despite the primary activities of the Democratic Tsunami involving protests and roadblocks, which raises questions about the proportionality and justification of such measures.

As I understand it, Catalonia has long desired for independence[1]. Is the Democratic Tsunami movement something different, entirely? If not, can someone fill-in the blanks of how vying for independence (in this case) gets umbrella'ed under terrorism?

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_movement

Edit: Accidental caps-lock on a word. My bad.
The evidence is they are changing the street names to stop bugs in software.

The question is what software is so hard to fix its easier to change the physical street names than fix the data entry for those street names.

Horizon seems the likely candidate, and the fix is equally stupid.
Are you seeking to elevate your residential design in Dubai or Abu Dhabi?

We are the best decor company for designing exquisite living spaces. Our extensive portfolio positions us among the leading decor companies in UAE, showcasing stunning projects delivered across the globe.
Reading ff source code, I saw something similar with a hole variable. I haven’t spent enough time on what happens though.

A good way to search the ff source code is to look at uniquely named JS functions and take it from there. I searched on reduceRight and found shift because of it.
I already explained that they implied the word real by using fake, and the word real is used in the article. You’re not even making a point. From your comment history, you’re a serial pedant and this entire thread is no different. Why are you like this?
Please never do this. I beg you.

This is why we can't have nice things, because someone somewhere always wants to cut a corner in a way that isn't as robust as they think it is.

I once had an argument with a junior developer that he can't just use a hash code directly instead of an equality check. It can be used as a first step to quickly reject unequal values, but equality must be verified. He disagreed right up until a finance report had "unexpected" dollar figures in it.

There is nothing I value more in the code I write than 100.0% pedantic correctness.

The opposite of this is inserting Thread.sleep(1000) into multi-threaded code to "fix" it.

It's a tiny, slippery step from skipping a correct parsing step to that eldritch madness.
It literally is, Outlook for Windows uses the IE9 engine to render HTML email, IIRC. And even then not everything is supported.
Based in London but have sent to some friends in Amsterdam who will be preparing for the exams soon! Seems like a great tool.
That must have changed. I worked there from 2006-2014, back then most design docs were useful and followed the basic structure described in the article (minus the system context diagram).

I noticed early on though, that design docs maintained in Google Docs tended to be of lower quality than those maintained in the version control repository. Not sure if that was just a proxy for when they were written or whether the code review process is just more rigorous than editing things in Docs, but the only time I wrote a large (40 page-ish?) design doc I did it using hand written HTML and we worked through the code review system, as was traditional. I also posted it to the central mailing list and web server and got feedback from employee number 3, which was nice. The central location made it easy to find them as they were sorted by category.

Still I don't recall design docs being important enough to matter for a promotion by themselves. Promos were supposed to be about overall impact, not production of specific artifacts. Of course the system was badly flawed, and often yielded surprising decisions in a bad way, but I don't remember ever reading an obviously-optimized-for-perf design doc back then.

If you can find the website that holds the design docs hand written in HTML from the earlier years, try perusing some of those and see if you find them more useful (or would have done when the systems were contemporary). Some of them old ones like SmartASS were full of detailed explanations of the underlying equations and models, which was quite helpful for understanding how it worked, as well as the explanations of why those approaches were chosen. Reading those helped informed my own design work later. I wasn't a director, just an engineer, and they did help.

There are also some Chrome design docs linked to from the chromium.org website that I found helpful in the past for understanding its design.
Switzerland does have strict laws on the topic. Data requests are only honoured for cases which are a crime both under the foreign country's law and under Swiss law.

If you live in a country where homosexuality is illegal, and your local government is chasing you because of this, a Swiss company won't comply with data requests, and a Swiss judge has no reason to honour any data request.

If your local government is chasing you because of something that is recognised as a crime in Switzerland, then they will disclose data to foreign authorities.
From Audio/Video to Text: Explore Yescribe.ai's Free Transcription Service
Ever heard of thermorectal cryptanalysis?

As long as your secure world is not fully isolated but has any interactions with the physical world at all (e.g a human being somewhere receiving and reading your message with his eyes), then it's only a matter of resources allocated to trace you. You can pile up layers of "hops" through uncooperative jurisdictions -- this certainly helps to raise the bar but doesn't give you a mathematical proof of security.
Wayve Raises $1.05B to Develop Embodied AI Products for Automated Driving
Cool. Next do the four color theorem.
Absolutely agree on the 'spectrum' point, and I would argue that it's not that case that 'normal' people can be somewhere on it, but everyone is on it, even if they're all the way to the left.

If we take OCD as an example, there's clearly a huge range from 'I like the TV volume to be set to an even number' through to massive impairments to functioning to the point it's impossible to hold down a job, or that it's damaging your personal relationships.

I am a bit less comfortable with saying that it's "super subjective" where you draw the cutoff though. I agree there's some subjectivity there, but the diagnostic cutoff (per DSM-V) is quite clearly defined, and leaves relatively little room for subjective interpretation: "The obsessions or compulsions are time-consuming (e.g. - take more than 1 hour per day) or cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning."

I think it's unhelpful if folks who (for example) like their TV to be set to an even number talk about 'their OCD'. Or people who like things to be neat and tidy. Similarly for ADHD, the verbiage is: 'interferes with functioning or development/there is clear evidence that the symptoms interfere with, or reduce the quality of, social, academic, or occupational functioning.' Or ASD, where it's defined as 'caus[ing] clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of current functioning.'
JDK 23 – JEP 474: ZGC: Generational Mode by Default